"Me, I'm just a sensible, moderate, fellow, who thinks that the Tories have the wrong recipe for a decent society. Even when they correctly identify the problem, they always get the wrong solution. I also believe that chasing Scottish independence is a sad waste of time and energy. It's a great sorrow to me that I have spent so much of my political energy opposing Tory wrong headedness about the Welfare State and Nationalist wrong headedness about the constitution, rather than concentrating on addressing the real problems in our country. Please blog politely and on subject. Anything abusive, obscene or too far off-subject will not be posted."Last year I posted this "Ah Luv Ma Cuuntry" ..... In which I bewailed the fact that Labour and the Nats have so much in common but we waste our energies on the futile battleground of "independence". After pointing this out to a Nationalist acquaintance, and getting a nod of agreement, I asked why, in that case, we were always at each others throats. I got the response "but ah luv ma cuuntry".... Depressing is not the word....
I've just seen the BBC report on the fact that Labour and the SNP are to form a coalition to run Edinburgh City Council. The leader of the SNP Group Steve Cardownie said "Labour is a Social Democrat Party and so are we (the SNP), so we should be able to work together".
Precisely.
We don't need "independence" to address the problems that beset our people. We just need to work together in the here and now. Instead we waste time and political energy pursuing the whole pointless idea, while those who need us wait and suffer.
It's a crime, IMO. A disaster which is absolutely and utterly avoidable. If only our Nationalist brethren would give up their obsession with abstract constitutional questions which solve nothing and help no-one. Why don't they realise that if we always work together and concentrate on solving the real and immediate problems which affect our communities we could, and probably would, make real progress to a better society.
After all that's what we all want, isn't it?
The only real advantage of voting for independence I see is that it would act as a bulwark against Westminster Tories.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your piece, and have been becoming more and more worried by the SNP under Salmond. Recent actions make the SNP look as right wing as Thatcher.
It will be interesting to see how Edinburgh turns out, but I don't really hold out any hopes for it.
I presume you are a Labour supporter. I fail to see them as anything other than another branch of the Tories.
I'm not trying to be offensive, because I fully agree with you when you say that you think independence is an unneeded distraction.
I find the SNPs implication that if you don't vote for them, or agree with them you're somehow less Scottish.
It's offensive and it fits the stereotype of Nationalism which borders on extremism.
I've read your comment posts elsewhere and approve highly of your ability to remain polite and on topic when faced with some horrendous provocation.
Regards.
To quote you quoting Steve Cardownie :
ReplyDelete"Labour is a Social Democrat Party and so are we (the SNP)"
I'm sorry, but nationalism can not sit along side social deomcracy - as you point out in other posts - in particually quoting Orwell's comments from the early part of the 20th Century - nationalism creates division, disparity and creates an "us and them" society. That is at complete odds with social democracy which has at its heart, social equality and equality of opportunity.
The SNP claim to be a left-of-centre party of social democratic tendancies, but they historically are a party of the right, have a high *grass roots* voter base with right-leaning tendacies (look at NE of scotand, Salmond's heartland) and their nationalist rhetoric is right-leaning - by virtue of the fact any nationalism is right-wing.
The SNP do a very, very good job at creating populist policies that look left-leaning, and portray them as scocial democratic. This plays well to the elecorate who think they are voting for "labour + indepencede" - or, more scarliy, the Scottish electorate actually WANT a right-of-centre party of government.
Most SNP activists I have met are right-of-centre in their views. Certainly the ones who canvassed me recently during the Edinburgh elections were.
The SNP's record in office of cutting spending on health, education and capital projects and wanting to cut corperation tax were reveal their core policies lean - i.e. to the right; and their want to blame it on "Westminster" and "london" - and portray an outside influenece as the reason everything is going wrong.
It is a crying shame that the only commintator recently to pick up on the SNP's tactic of creating an bogey man to blame it all on is the complete bampot historian Starky - he says some outrageous things, but he picked up on that, like all nationalist movements, the SNP inherrently use tactics like the above. Foulkes who dared to call-up this tactic some years ago was derided, and more recently, Joan McAlpine has questioned the partriotism of anyone who questions the SNP. Doesn't that sound similar to other nationalist movements, thankfully confinded to history? It is a shame that no mainstream, credable commintator is prepared to point out the elephant in the room. Are they scared to point out the truth? Do they agree with this approach, or am I seeing phantom elephants :-)
I don't think I am. I am non-white and have an English accent - why is it since the rise of nationalism, Scotland is the only country in the world that when I say "I'm Scottish" am I then told "you don't look or sound it?"
How any left-leaning person like, for example Steve Cardownie, a once labour concillor can think the SNP are progressive left-leaning party, I find hard to fathom.
Davy V
ReplyDeleteDon't disagree with you analysis, and I think other have pinted out the right-wing leanings of the Nats.
My point is, if Cardownie thinks that a Lab/SNP coalition has the policies to address the country's problems, then "independence" is not needed.
I don't agree Labour and Nats have so much in common.
ReplyDeleteThere is some policy overlap as both parties scrabble to get the centre ground (esp. with the collapse of the Lib Dems), but that is it.
Scratch the surface and the history, make up, traditions and vision are starkly different.
I think they are polls apart (no pun intendeded :-) ) and it's time the Labour party stood up and said this loud and strong.
However, that will most likely backfire - because my suspiscion is that the Scottish electorate - like the electorate in the rest of the UK has actually taken a shift to the right. The anomoly is the UK general election when the support for Labour grew in Scotland (was this because Gordon Brown was Scots?) when the trend was actually away from Labour in England to Tory, and then well towards the SNP in the following Holyrood election - to a right-of-centre party, too.
Labour has made ground in the local elections all of the UK - but, is this the "mid term effect"?
Incedently, a follower of political history in Scotland mentioned to me that nationalist support always increases when the Scottish football team isn't doing that well.
I support Independence although I perhaps would not vote SNP in an Independent Scotland. I support the SNP at the moment because they are the main party proposing Independence.
ReplyDeleteI support Independence mainly because I have lived through the last fifty years of rule from London,both tory and labour and I feel,honestly that Scotland has been let down by both of them.
I have no desire to list the reasons i have for feeling this way as if you think Scotland has had a fair deal from what has happened over that period then we should just agree to disagree.
It seems to me that doing the same thing and expecting a different result seems kinda silly (as a very clever man once said)
There just comes a time when you have to grow up leave the nest and take your own decisions and ,yes,make your own mistakes and make the best job you can with what you have. Alternatively you could just stay 'safe' with mummy and daddy and not realise what it is to be a grown up person taking charge of your own future.
Don't be afraid 'BRAVEHEART'
Jafurn
DeleteI respect your support for "independence", even if you can't explain why you support it.
It's quite a common position in my experience. I've been trying for years to get many, indeed any, Nationalists to present a clear and logical case for "independence", but with no success.
I have to say, "Follow me, I don't know where I'm going" isn't a very persuasive message IMO.
You say I have given no explanation for the fact that Independence is my preferred stance.
ReplyDeleteWell here are some of them...
Part one... (My response was too long so I have had to break it down into manageable chunks, part two to follow.)
If we vote Yes to Independence the result will be
* take control of our own destiny and can shape the future for our children.
* One of the first actions of the UK government in 1707 was to raise taxes across Scotland. When we resume our sovereign status we will no longer require the mass of civil servants and red tape to provide the long range control from Westminster, nor will we require contributing to the massive overheads of the Westminster government; we will thus not require the same level of taxes.
* Scotland and England will require negotiating the division of the UK gross assets. Scotland with 8.6 % of the population of the UK contributes some 9.4% of the tax revenues of the UK.
* The question of our share of the national debt will require to be agreed. Currently the bulk of the debt has been and is accrued to London and the south-east of England with only some £16 billion being incurred against Scotland.
* A further debt to be dealt with is the £5.1 billion in PFI/PPP debt incurred by the previous Labour and Lib-Dem executives.
* Scotland will take its place as a member of the United Nations.
* We will take membership of at least 50 international organizations such as the IMF, C of E, OSCE, UNECE, etc.
* The Scottish government will set out an annual budget for all Scottish tax revenues and be responsible under the Constitution for an effective fiscal policy suitable for Scotland.
* There will be the option to reduce fuel prices at the pumps with a lower tax level and incorporate the cost of vehicle tax licenses into the fuel price.
* It is likely that it will take some two to three years to put in place all the offices of state which will be required and to negotiate shared responsibilities with rumpUK.
* We will be responsible for all assets within our own coastal waters and Exclusive Economic Zone including those areas of the seabed and continental shelf within these areas.
* All Crown estate revenues under Scots control.
* We will trade with all 50 European countries through membership of EFTA/EEA. As a member of EFTA we will have only a quarter of the regulations currently required by the EU - this will be a significant cost saving for both public and the private sectors.
* We will trade with all Commonwealth countries - without the current EU restrictions.
* We will build up our own Scottish Defense Force and supporting industries. This will provide far more jobs here in Scotland than we have been left with by successive reductions by the UK government.
* Regain control of our own fish stocks and related jobs.
* Regain control of our farming and rural industries.
* Develop our tourist industry based on Scottish interests and culture.
* All court fines to be retained in Scotland.
* Switch to a modern cost-effective low tax system.
* Provide a more flexible pension system to enable the elderly to live with dignity.
* Progressively increase the lower working wage limits.
* Program a systematic reduction of the civil service controlled from Westminster.
* Review and modernize the judicial system.
* Re-organize local government and reduce the associated red tape.
* The opportunity to enable properly regulated markets to run and improve sections of the economy, reducing the reliance on unproductive public spending. We need to create wealth before we can distribute wealth.
That is not an exhaustive list merely a flavour.
Which of these are reasons for breaking up the UK?
Deletejarfur said "You say I have given no explanation for the fact that Independence is my preferred stance."
ReplyDeleteNo, you said it.... "I have no desire to list the reasons i have for feeling this way"
Braveheart14 May 2012 08:33
ReplyDeleteJafurn
"I respect your support for "independence", even if you can't explain why you support it."
That is where you suggested I could not explain.
All of them are some of MY reasons for wanting Scotland to be Independent. The UK in my opinion (as stated in part 2 of my post) has not delivered for Scotland and it is time for we in Scotland to take control of our own destiny.
ReplyDeletePS what happened to part 2 of my post?
Moderation seems to have failed, too many words. Here it is cut and pasted..
DeletePart two...
If we vote No to Independence the result may be:
* We will continue in a large, established union which is in economic and moral decline.
* We will continue to subsidize the south-east of England.
* We will remain a lucrative milk cow to a resource poor neighbor with 12 times the voting power we possess.
* The division of wealth and inequality within the UK will continue to grow, favoring the well-heeled few at the expense of the majority of tax payers.
* Subsidize English electrical supplies with Scots pay higher domestic charges.
* Scots power generators continue to be charged higher grid connection fees than the English.
* Immigration policy to remain based on English Home Counties requirements.
* All Scottish court fines continue to be paid to Westminster.
* All Scottish oil and gas revenues continue to go to Westminster to pay off debt
* Our military personnel will continue to serve around the world, to serve the military needs of the UK government, without regard for the opinions of the Scots public.
* We will continue to have the Trident nuclear weapon system located adjacent to the largest city in Scotland and to pay for all its maintenance and upkeep.
* We will be drawn into further wars to satisfy the political ambitions of Westminster politicians.
* All revenues from Scotland's seabed will continue to go direct to the UK government.
* A continuation of the rise in fuel prices at the pumps.
Again not exhaustive but merely a flavor.
more....."As for my saying this..
Delete"I have no desire to list the reasons I have for feeling this way as if you think Scotland has had a fair deal from what has happened over that period then we should just agree to disagree".
I can list all my reasons for feeling that way as well. All I meant was that I respect that you do not and would probably never agree with me and I was not trying to get into a tit for tat argument. Nor am I saying you would be wrong, only that I felt we would probably disagree. I respect your belief that Scotland is better off as part of this union.
That's fine by me so let us have the debate in the country and then in 2014 the referendum and we shall find out what the people of Scotland think. I for one have a strong feeling that the decision will be YES.
This part of your response is very interesting...
"One conclusion is that leaps from this approach is that the "disappointments" are internal, they are failings of the individual and that feeling of inadequacy is assuaged and targeted against the "them" that stop us from achieving whatever it is we failed to achieve in life. Better to blame "the English" than blame ourselves."
Where do you get the idea from that I am blaming "the English"?
I never even once in my post mentioned the English.
I have personally lived and worked in England for the best part of 20 years and have great affection for "the English" as you put it. My problem is being ruled from Westminster and that has often included being governed by Scotsmen so I can assure you I attach no blame to the English people, my beef is with the rulers of both the English and the Scottish people running everything from London.
I may post ALL my reasons for not having faith in the union later but just as an appetizer let's start with this...
I have read that 7 out the top ten areas for welfare dependency in the UK are in Scotland and 4 of them are in Glasgow. After some 50 years of rule from Westminster by both Labour and Tory government I just think maybe it’s time to take control of our own destiny.
Have you seen this …?
http://www.oilofscotland.org/mccrone_oil_reports.html
Or this....
http://sunnyscotland.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/The-McCrone-report-An-embarrassment-of-riches.pdf
When I first saw these reports a few years ago I was finally convinced that Scotland would be better not to be DEPENDENT on Westminster looking after our interests and we would be far better off doing it ourselves."
jarfur,, "* One of the first actions of the UK government in 1707 was to raise taxes across Scotland. When we resume our sovereign status we will no longer require the mass of civil servants and red tape to provide the long range control from Westminster, nor will we require contributing to the massive overheads of the Westminster government; we will thus not require the same level of taxes.
Delete* Scotland and England will require negotiating the division of the UK gross assets. Scotland with 8.6 % of the population of the UK contributes some 9.4% of the tax revenues of the UK.
* The question of our share of the national debt will require to be agreed. Currently the bulk of the debt has been and is accrued to London and the south-east of England with only some £16 billion being incurred against Scotland.
* A further debt to be dealt with is the £5.1 billion in PFI/PPP debt incurred by the previous Labour and Lib-Dem executives."
These are observations, not reasons.... Which bits do you think support the case for breaking up the UK, now?
Thank you for the cut and paste ..maybe I got a bit carried away.
ReplyDeleteOK Braveheart this is where we differ. These observations as you call them are to me what I look at when making up my mind about this issue all of them taken together form my opinion that we are not getting a fair deal from being 'run' from Westminsterand therefore I will be voting to become an Independent country in 2014.
ReplyDeleteI am aware that anything I say will not alter your view and that is not my intention. I can agree to disagree.
Perhaps you would care to illustrate to me some reasons or even observations that you may have for remaining in the Union.
Yoy say in your profile..
"I also believe that chasing Scottish independence is a sad waste of time and energy. It's a great sorrow to me that I have spent so much of my political energy opposing Tory wrong headedness about the Welfare State and Nationalist wrong headedness about the constitution, rather than concentrating on addressing the real problems in our country."
So in what way are the problems of our country being addressed by being in Union. after all if these things were being addressed then maybe there would be no need for Independence.
Just a thought.
Good talking to you anyway.
Sorry jarfur,
ReplyDelete"..* Scotland and England will require negotiating the division of the UK gross assets. .." is not a reason ...
It would be a consequence, and a problem, if the UK was broken up. It could be used as an argument against breaking up the UK if you so wished, but it's not a reason for "independence" or anything else.
This is what I did not want to do. We could argue semantics all day or from now to the referendum. You pick a hole here and I pick a hole there ( and I am sure I could if you were to publish some of your own reasons for what you think)
ReplyDeleteI agree 'negotiating the division of the UK gross assets' could be a problem but A problem is something to be solved it is not an insurmountable reason NOT to be Independent either. I keep on reading how Scotland is being subsidised by England and if you listen to some we always have been. So maybe a division of the assets would finally lay that ,in my opinion, myth and we move on.
None of my 'reasons,observations,feelings,suspicions (call them what you will) in themselves are A REASON for being Independent . All I am trying to convey is that FOR ME taken as a whole and on balance (and as Mr Humphry might have said,in the fullness of time)all instill in me a strong desire to go for Independence.
Give me your reasons not to and I will give them careful consideration. Most of the Unionist supporters I see, and yes most of them are politicians, are always going on about the POSITIVE CASE FOR THE UNION well where is it. None of them seem able to make it.
@jarfur "This is what I did not want to do."
DeleteI know that. You don't want to discuss the issues because you can't.
"We could argue semantics all day or from now to the referendum."
It's not semantics, we should argue facts. Unless you want it to be all about semantics. That would make sense from your point of view, as you seem a bit not to really like facts.
(@jarfur "This is what I did not want to do."
ReplyDeleteI know that. You don't want to discuss the issues because you can't.)
I have given you loads of issues which you do not engage with. WHY NOT?
I have asked you to give me your reasons for sticking with the union but you refuse to engage . All you do is snipe ...you pick out a sentence or one or two points which I have made and think you are being clever by turning it around ..well in my mind that is not debate that is semantics.
You say..
"we should argue facts."
What single 'fact' have you brought to the discussion....none thats how many ...absolutely none.
OK Braveheart let us leave it there...
Unless you are willing to cite at least ONE reason to stay in this UNION then you are just full of non-sense .
Go on just give me one single reason .
I have cited a whole list of issues to discuss but all you want to do is nit-pick about my choice of words.
Good luck to your side when the referendum comes.
Two reasons:
Delete1. It works
2. There's no sensible reason that you have presented to break up a successful union.
..that's it.... it works? OK you win I'm convinced.
ReplyDeleteJust to be semantic ,as you seem to like...your second reason is the same as your first. i.e. 'successful' and 'it works' amounts to the same thing.
Nice trying to talk to you and again good luck for the referendum.
it works
ReplyDeletemy second sentence pointed out that you have presented no sensible reason for stopping it working...
you still haven't, but then almost your first statement was that you "had no desire to" give any reasons.... an ambition which you have achieved ...
congratulations...!!!
HA HA HA HA
ReplyDeleteSo you agree I achieved!!!
I s this what you mean by
ReplyDeleteIT WORKS...
Child poverty...is that another union dividend?
http://www.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/health/child-poverty-rate-in-scotland-reaches-1-in-5-1-2045713
CHILDREN in one in five Scottish families live in poverty, campaigners have warned, with fears that number is set to rise.
Charities behind the Campaign to End Child Poverty have revealed a map of Scotland, highlighting areas where youngsters’ lives are blighted by deprivation.
All six areas with the highest levels of child poverty are in Glasgow, where in some parts every other child lives in a family struggling to put food on the table or pay heating bills
and this...
http://campaigns.stv.tv/stv-appeal/why-were-doing-it/child-poverty-in-scotland-the-facts/
Be in the know:
Poverty in Scotland is significantly higher than in other European countries. Currently 25% of all children in Scotland live in poverty.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
or let's look at fuel poverty....
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/consumers/fuel_poverty/chp1.pdf
http://www.cas.org.uk/news/2011-news/September/New+report+shows+Scotlands+shameful+fuel+poverty+crisis
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/1035/0060411.pdf
You are really stealing my line there....
ReplyDelete"you have presented no sensible reason for stopping it working...
you still haven't, but then almost your first statement was that you "had no desire to" give any reasons.... an ambition which you have achieved ...
congratulations...!!!"
See how easy it is to cut and paste an argument????
"my second sentence pointed out that you have presented no sensible reason for stopping it working..."
ReplyDeleteYou really do have to go back to the drawing board with that one.....
Your second sentence merely reiterated your assertion that it was working; without presenting us with any evidence to support 'your claim' that it was working.
I guess that's what you mean by facts!!!!
"IF I SAY SO THEN IT IS A FACT"
reminds me of this...
"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality was tacitly denied by their philosophy"
Who is gonna let reality impinge on a dream???
Do you know what I like the most about this little tet a tet....you REALLY think I am the one who is in the wrong!!!!!
ReplyDeleteHere is another example of how...
ReplyDelete" IT WORKS "
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-12898723
Scotland's life expectancy amongst lowest in Europe
The health and well-being of its citizens is the primary responsibility any government. After 300 years 0f Unionist government, Scotland has the LOWEST LIFE EXPECTANCY AT BIRTH in Western Europe. Is there any connection or is it just that the Scottish people are the most indolent and feckless race in Europe?
That's all folks!!!